Ah Hallows' Eve. the perfect time to -- drink wine? That is the opinion of Catherine Granger at the Purple Liquid blog and she has a suggestion: 2003 Muccigrosso Pinot Noir. Ms. Granger does a decent job of describing the wines flavor and balance and compares it to other wine categories and even manages to suggest a complimenting food (pumpkin). The review could have been longer though. There is an overview of the wine, but there is no delving into the depth of the wine. Of course Catherine Granger is not a professional wine critic and as an amateur she does a decent job of conveying the wine with an amusing, personal flair.

The first thing of note at The Critical Critics' is there grading scale. it is the inverse of the normal star based scale. The goal for a film is to garner the fewest amount of turds. An interesting approach to try and set oneself apart form other reviewers, if only the rest of the review was as creative.
General Disdain's review of American Gangster begins with the absurd assumption that the film is some sort of underdog story and that we enjoy watching because of the anti heroes courageous struggle against the odds. Then we get an uninspired plot synopsis in which we are reminded that this movie bares a resemblance to "Scarface" and "Serpicio" combined.
Disdain likes this movie despite the fact that it contributes nothing new to the genre or is particularly creative. The reviewer likes the look and feel of the movie and I think he likes either the acting or the writing of the main characters. But there is a complaint that the movie lasts too long and that some of the minor characters were superfluous and the ending tacked on.
This review seems to mirror the movie itself. It is nothing new, it is too long, and I can probably find a better review (and movie) somewhere else. I give it 5 turds.

Powered by ScribeFire.

This week is the Sunday New York Times Book Review music edition. And, surprising or not, there are a large number of musically inclined pieces of literature on the market. From The Beatles, Eric Clapton, a muse, and how music affects the brain. And if that wasn’t enough, Alex Ross of the New Yorker has tried to distil the music of the entire 20th century.
The Rest is Noise: Listening to the 20th Century is reviewed by Geoff Dyer starts with the question that all reviewers should ask themselves which is “am I qualified to write this review.” This device also helps to establish the audience for the review: those who, like the author, have an appreciation for music without a comprehensive and exhaustive knowledge of its theory. If the Mr. Ross can convey his message to the reviewer then the book is successful.
Mr. Dyer powers through the synopsis highlighting the composers mentioned and how Mr. Ross shows how they reflect the historic era in which they lived and worked. The reviewer points out that the beginning of the book feels like “a linked series of adroitly composed New Yorkerish profiles” until the events leading to and following the Second World War This is where the book seems to take of due to several factors such as the use of music by fascist dictators and the coming together of disposed artists in Hollywood. Mr. Dyer compares the book to a symphony in itself, in the way that it returns to common themes and composers and weaves them into a coherent history of the last century. After World War II and subsequent fragmentation and development in all of the arts the tome obviously becomes less focused. There is a complaint that not all of the influential artists of the late 20th century are not given the credit that they deserve.
Overall Mr. Dyer is very impressed with the work and the way that Alex Ross has compiled it. From the review, I am excited to read the book too. I must be honest and say that the concept of the book was intriguing to me before hand, but a glowing review that seems well crafted does increase my curiosity. Therefore, I must say that Geoff Dyer has succeed and created an excellent review that tells me exactly what I need to know about the book and whether I should buy it. This leads us back to the beginning of the review where Mr. Dyer introduces himself as a someone interested in the book and its premise as I am, and I can’t help but wonder if this review would be helpful to someone unlike Mr. Dyer or myself.

Jack Mathews over at the New York Daily News has reviewed the latest Sidney Lumet film “Before the Devil Knows You're Dead” and he doesn’t spare his admiration for the Director or his work. The review starts with a weak introduction to Lumet that states that he is one of the preeminent “New York” film makers while doing little to make the reader believe it. Next, despite a brief synopsis at the beginning of the article, Mathews provides an even more lackluster and equally brief description of the plot. Incased in this review is minimal description of, well, anything. The actors are lightly mentioned and so is any information of what the movie is. It is “grim” and that “Lumet chose to tell this story with a fractured time line” but I don’t know why or what affect this has on the movie or the audience. This review tells me nothing except that Jack Matthews likes Sidney Lumet and that I don’t need to read any more of his reviews.